Will the United States launch a kinetic strike against Iran before 1 August 2025?
Read time: 7–8 minutes
This question also is active on the crowd forecasting platforms at the RAND Forecasting Initiative and Polymarket. Which will turn out to be most accurate, the human crowds or our bots?
Jeremy Lichtman’s Multi-AI Oracle predicts 45%. Here’s how it reached this answer:
Obtaining outside data.
Checking internet sources, using keywords: United States Iran kinetic strike
News from various sources:
The document outlines escalating tensions between the United States, Iran, and Israel, centering around Iran’s nuclear program and potential military conflicts. Here is a summary of the key points:
1. **Trump’s Iran Strike Plan**: U.S. President Donald Trump has reportedly approved a plan to strike Iran but is withholding the final order in hopes that Iran will halt its nuclear enrichment activities. Tensions have risen due to Iran’s refusal to surrender and ongoing nuclear development activities.
2. **Khamenei’s Rejection**: Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has rejected Trump’s demands for unconditional surrender, asserting that Iran will not capitulate and will respond to any threats with reciprocal actions.
3. **International Reactions**: Russia has warned the U.S. against arming Israel, and the UK has placed its cabinet on emergency alert for a possible U.S. attack on Iran. Satellite imagery indicates U.S. warships are positioning themselves within range of Iran.
4. **Financial Impact**: The potential conflict is affecting global markets, with significant increases in tanker charter rates and concerns about disruptions in oil supply leading to rising crude prices.
5. **Israel’s Position**: Israel has conducted strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, killing senior IRGC commanders. The country is preparing for possible retaliation and has informed the U.S. of its readiness to conduct further strikes independently.
6. **Diplomatic Efforts**: Despite military preparations, Trump’s administration claims to seek a diplomatic resolution to the Iran nuclear issue. Negotiations continue, aiming for Iran to agree to enrich uranium only to non-weaponizable levels.
7. **Iran’s Nuclear Development**: Iran has continued to enhance its nuclear capabilities, increasing uranium enrichment levels and replacing aging centrifuges. This activity has been condemned by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
8. **Geopolitical Tensions**: The possibility of an expanded conflict involving multiple countries looms, as military actions by Israel and the U.S. could provoke widespread instability in the region. The situation remains volatile, with significant risks of escalation.
The situation described suggests a precarious balance between military posturing and diplomatic negotiations, with potential implications for global security and economic stability.
Fact-checking news summary:
…Fact-check did not return a result. Using news summary.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 30%
The question difficulty is rated 8 (0 to 10)
A Bayesian calculation could be performed as follows:
Using a weighted approach, increased tensions (weight 0.3) and Israel’s historic willingness to strike (weight 0.25) increase probability. Diplomatic efforts (weight 0.2) slightly reduce overall risk. Combined likelihood of strike is around 45%, adjusted for diplomatic probability, yielding an estimate of 30% for actual conflict.
Bayesian base rate: 30%
Sufficient news to provide a good forecast? 1 (0 or 1)
News is relevant, topical and unbiased? 1 (0 or 1)
Question classification: scenario_based_forecast
The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
I considered historical tension levels and frequency of conflicts between the US, Iran, and Israel, factoring in current diplomatic negotiations and recent military activities. Historical intervention events suggest tensions without escalation to full conflict are common.
Ideally, the news feed would contain the following sorts of information for a better forecast:
Access to classified intelligence on diplomatic communications or military strategies would greatly enhance forecast accuracy. Insights into Iranian strategic posture would inform Iranian potential responses.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate:
Potential for successful diplomatic mitigation or unexpected third-party interventions could shift outcomes. Economic dependencies on stable oil supplies may exert pressure for non-military solutions.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– US President executes plan to strike Iran Unlikely
– Iran refuses to halt nuclear enrichment activities Very Likely
– Israel conducts further strikes against Iran Likely
– Diplomatic efforts between the US and Iran fail completely Moderate
– Geopolitical tensions escalate into broader conflict Moderate
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.75 – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.45 – confidence: 5)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.25 – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.45
Base rate: 0.3 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.21
MAPD: 0.33333333333333
Confidence: 5
Conf Mode: Low
Mellers: 0.43
Reverse Mellers: 0.47
Theory of Mind: 0 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.19
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3
Explanations of the above statistical measures here —>
Model value: 45%
The AI analyses revolve around the likelihood of a U.S. military strike on Iran, with the probability influenced by many interconnected factors. There is historical precedent for U.S.-Iran tensions not escalating into direct conflict, and ongoing diplomatic endeavors, while strained, remain a mitigating factor against an immediate military response. Key elements heightening tension include Iran’s continued nuclear activities and Israel’s strikes against Iranian targets, with both countries’ actions sustaining a precarious geopolitical balance involving multiple international actors such as Russia, the UK, and China. Economic considerations, especially related to oil supplies, further complicate the decision-making calculus. While the U.S. has shown military readiness and President Trump’s unpredictable decision-making style adds an element of uncertainty, economic pressures and potential diplomatic breakthroughs could prevent an escalation into conflict. The limited timeframe for a decision increases urgency, but also might hinder military action if diplomatic and procedural processes delay responses, leaving open the possibility that Trump’s posture could merely serve as negotiating leverage.
Runtime: 195 seconds.
Past forecasts by Phil’s and Jeremy ’s bots —>
Below, recent results at the RAND Forecasting Initiative.
